Dual Objectives in Invasion

Reach’s Invasion was perhaps the best study on creating decisions
for defenders while also giving the defenders no time to make them. The
classic example is the dual territories scenario and how a defender must
know which of the two Objectives he should defend. The decision that
the defender is faced with is Should he abandon one Objective to save the other?

The two Objectives are forged close enough to each other that a
defender can move from one to the other in time to interfere with an
offensive push. However, they are far enough away that he cannot defend
both at the same time.

A feature of the Game Type ensures that when an offensive push is
repelled, the Objectives return to a minimum amount of time to capture –
their Float Time – so that this decision remains credible. The purpose
of the Float Time is to avoid the scenario where one Objective has just a
couple seconds left, leaving the defenders with no choice but to remain
and defend that Objective.

This Float Time determines how far the two Objectives can be forged
from each other. If the Objectives are too far apart, then the decision
to abandon one Objective to save the other is no longer a credible
decision.

Not only does forging the two Objectives just within the
Float Time apart from each other make the decision to abandon one
Objective to save the other credible, it also offers the decision to
defenders without any time to think through the consequences. It is this
type of decision where there is no real time to think that makes
Invasion interesting, where the invaders can trick the defenders into
making a game breaking decision. It is this type of forging that adds a
tremendous amount of depth to an Invasion map.

Invasion makes a great case study on forging depth into a map, though
I doubt we will ever see a Game Type on the same level of complexity
again. Nonetheless, I include it here to add to the breadth of this
discussion.

Summary

Invasion is a Game Type that required specific features forged into your map that naturally provides quite a bit of depth.

The more intense types of decisions are those that are game breakers
for which players have no time to think through the consequences.